Jaculabilis
/
www
1
0
Fork 0
Code

Add more early documents

This commit is contained in:
Tim Van Baak 2023-09-29 15:48:13 -07:00
parent 7aef7edf19
commit 770324312d
4 changed files with 129 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

29
src/page/ecumen/florence-1439.md Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
---
title: Bull of Union with the Greeks
date: 1439-07-06
author: Pope Eugene IV
source: https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum17.htm
source: https://www.vatican.va/content/eugenius-iv/la/documents/bulla-laetentur-caeli-6-iulii-1439.html
---
Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. With the agreement of our most dear son John Palaeologus, illustrious emperor of the Romans, of the deputies of our venerable brothers the patriarchs and of other representatives of the eastern church, to the following.
Let the heavens be glad and let the earth rejoice. For, the wall that divided the western and the eastern church has been removed, peace and harmony have returned, since the corner-stone, Christ, who made both one, has joined both sides with a very strong bond of love and peace, uniting and holding them together in a covenant of everlasting unity. After a long haze of grief and a dark and unlovely gloom of long-enduring strife, the radiance of hoped-for union has illuminated all.
Let mother church also rejoice. For she now beholds her sons hitherto in disagreement returned to unity and peace, and she who hitherto wept at their separation now gives thanks to God with inexpressible joy at their truly marvellous harmony. Let all the faithful throughout the world, and those who go by the name of Christian, be glad with mother catholic church. For behold, western and eastern fathers after a very long period of disagreement and discord, submitting themselves to the perils of sea and land and having endured labours of all kinds, came together in this holy ecumenical council, joyful and eager in their desire for this most holy union and to restore intact the ancient love. In no way have they been frustrated in their intent. After a long and very toilsome investigation, at last by the clemency of the holy Spirit they have achieved this greatly desired and most holy union. Who, then, can adequately thank God for his gracious gifts?’ Who would not stand amazed at the riches of such great divine mercy? Would not even an iron breast be softened by this immensity of heavenly condescension?
These truly are works of God, not devices of human frailty. Hence they are to be accepted with extraordinary veneration and to be furthered with praises to God. To you praise, to you glory, to you thanks, O Christ, source of mercies, who have bestowed so much good on your spouse the catholic church and have manifested your miracles of mercy in our generation, so that all should proclaim your wonders. Great indeed and divine is the gift that God has bestowed on us. We have seen with our eyes what many before greatly desired yet could not behold.
For when Latins and Greeks came together in this holy synod, they all strove that, among other things, the article about the procession of the holy Spirit should be discussed with the utmost care and assiduous investigation. Texts were produced from divine scriptures and many authorities of eastern and western holy doctors, some saying the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, others saying the procession is from the Father through the Son. All were aiming at the same meaning in different words. The Greeks asserted that when they claim that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, they do not intend to exclude the Son; but because it seemed to them that the Latins assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and two spirations, they refrained from saying that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The Latins asserted that they say the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son not with the intention of excluding the Father from being the source and principle of all deity, that is of the Son and of the holy Spirit, nor to imply that the Son does not receive from the Father, because the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, nor that they posit two principles or two spirations; but they assert that there is only one principle and a single spiration of the holy Spirit, as they have asserted hitherto. Since, then, one and the same meaning resulted from all this, they unanimously agreed and consented to the following holy and God-pleasing union, in the same sense and with one mind.
In the name of the holy Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, we define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence, that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son, and has his essence and his subsistent being from the Father together with the Son, and proceeds from both eternally as from one principle and a single spiration. We declare that when holy doctors and fathers say that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks indeed as cause, and according to the Latins as principle of the subsistence of the holy Spirit, just like the Father.
And since the Father gave to his only-begotten Son in begetting him everything the Father has, except to be the Father, so the Son has eternally from the Father, by whom he was eternally begotten, this also, namely that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.
We define also that the explanation of those words “and from the Son” was licitly and reasonably added to the creed for the sake of declaring the truth and from imminent need.
Also, the body of Christ is truly confected in both unleavened and leavened wheat bread, and priests should confect the body of Christ in either, that is, each priest according to the custom of his western or eastern church. Also, if truly penitent people die in the love of God before they have made satisfaction for acts and omissions by worthy fruits of repentance, their souls are cleansed after death by cleansing pains; and the suffrages of the living faithful avail them in giving relief from such pains, that is, sacrifices of masses, prayers, almsgiving and other acts of devotion which have been customarily performed by some of the faithful for others of the faithful in accordance with the church’s ordinances.
Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. We also define that the holy apostolic see and the Roman pontiff holds the primacy over the whole world and the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter prince of the apostles, and that he is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole church and the father and teacher of all Christians, and to him was committed in blessed Peter the full power of tending, ruling and governing the whole church, as is contained also in the acts of ecumenical councils and in the sacred canons.
Also, renewing the order of the other patriarchs which has been handed down in the canons, the patriarch of Constantinople should be second after the most holy Roman pontiff, third should be the patriarch of Alexandria, fourth the patriarch of Antioch, and fifth the patriarch of Jerusalem, without prejudice to all their privileges and rights.

6
src/page/ecumen/index.md
View File

@ -15,8 +15,14 @@ Any errors are my own.
## 13th century ## 13th century
* Second Council of Lyons — [First Constitution](./lyons2-1274.md)
* [Tomos of the Council of Blachernae](./tomos-1285-blachernae.md) * [Tomos of the Council of Blachernae](./tomos-1285-blachernae.md)
## 15th century
* Council of Florence — [Laetentur Caeli](./florence-1439.md)
* Mark of Ephesus — [Encyclical Letter](./mark-1440-encyclical.md)
## 16th century ## 16th century
* The [Union of Brest](./union-of-brest.md) * The [Union of Brest](./union-of-brest.md)

10
src/page/ecumen/lyons2-1274.md Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
---
title: Second Council of Lyons
date: 1274
source: https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum14.htm
comment: Lyons II promulgated a number of constitutions; I have reproduced here only the one on the subject of the Filioque, as the others don't appear to me to be relevant to the topic of this index.
---
## 1. On the supreme Trinity and the catholic faith
1\. We profess faithfully and devotedly that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful, has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or rashly to assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and not as from one.

84
src/page/ecumen/mark-1440-encyclical.md Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
---
title: Encyclical Letter of Mark of Ephesus
date: 1440-07
author: Metropolitan Mark of Ephesus
source: https://archive.org/details/100101V17N05061981SepOctNovDec/013%20V03N02%201967%20Mar%20Apr%20May/page/n17/mode/2up
---
*The many writings of St Mark occasioned by the false Union of Florence are an important source material for all who wish to understand the position of the Church of Christ as against the heresies of the Roman Church, as well as against the pseudo-Orthodoxy that proclaims that "nothing separates us" precisely where the Fathers have pronounced anathema.*
*The present Letter was written probably in July of 1440 as an answer to the promulgation in Constantinople of the false Union.[^1]*
[^1]: Translated from the Russian translation of Archimandrite Amvrossv Pogodin, in *St. Mark of Ephesus and the Union of Florence*, Jordanville, N.Y., 1961, pp. 331-8.
To All Orthodox Christians on the Mainland and in the Islands.
From Mark, Bishop of the Metropolis of Ephesus—Rejoice in Christ!
To those who have ensnared us in an evil captivity and desire to lead us away into the Babylon of Latin rites and dogmas could not, of course, completely accomplish this, seeing immediately that there was little chance of it, in fact that it was simply impossible; but having stopped somewhere in the middle, both they and those who followed after them, they neither remained any longer what they were, nor became anything else. For having quit Jerusalem, a firm and unwavering faith, but being in no condition and not wishing to become and to be called Babylonians, they thus called themselves, as if by right, "Greco-Latins," and among the people are called "Latinizers." And so these split people, like the mythical centaurs, confess together with the Latins that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, and has the Son as Cause of His existence, and yet together with us confess that He proceeds from the Father. And they say together with them that the addition to the Creed (of the *Filioque*) was done canonically and with blessing, and yet together with us do not permit it to be uttered (Besides, who would turn away from what was canonical and blessed?!). And they say together with them that unleavened bread is the Body of Christ, and yet together with us do not dare to accept it. Is this not sufficient to reveal their spirit, and how that it was not in a quest for the Truth (which, having in their hands, they betrayed) that they came together with the Latins, but rather from a desire to enrich themselves and to conclude not a true, but false, Union.
## II
But one should examine in what manner they have united with them; for everything that is united to something different is naturally united by means of some middle point between them. And thus they imagined to unite with them by means of some judgment concerning the Holy Spirit, together with them expressing the opinion that He has existence also from the Son; but everything else between them is divergent, and there is among them neither any middle point nor anything in common. Just as before two divergent Creeds are uttered; likewise, there are celebrated two Liturgies, divergent and discordant one with the other: one with leavened bread, the other with unleavened bread; divergent also are baptisms: one performed with triple immersion, the other with pouring over the head from above, and one with anointing with chrism, the other completely without; and all rites are in everything divergent and discordant one with the other, and likewise the fasts and church usages and other like things. What kind of unity is this, when there is no apparent and clear sign of it? And in what manner have they united with them, desiring also to preserve their own (for in this they were unanimous) and at the same time not following the traditions of the Fathers?
## III
But what is their own "wise" opinion? "Never," they say, "has the Greek Church said that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father; she has said simply that He proceeds from the Father, thus not excluding the participation of the Son in the procession of the Holy Spirit. Therefore (they say) both before and now we exhibit unity."
Alas, what absurdity! Alas, what blindness! If the Greek Church, having received it from Christ Himself and the Holy Apostles and Fathers, has said that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, but has never said (for she has received this from no one) that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, then what else does this signify than that she affirms that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father? For if He is not from the Son, evidently, He is only from the Father.
Do you know what is said concerning the Generation? "Begotten of the Father before all ages." Would anyone add here "only of the Father?" Yet it is precisely thus and in no other way that we understand it, and, if need be, will express it. For we have been taught that the Son is begotten of none else, but only of the Father. Therefore too John Damascene says, on behalf of the whole Church and all Christians: "We do not say that the Holy Spirit is from the Son."[^a] And if we do not say that the Spirit is also from the Son, then it is apparent that we thus say that the Spirit is only from the Father; therefore a little before this he says: "We do not call the Son Cause,"[^b] and in the next chapter: "The sole Cause is the Father."[^c]
[^a]: Joann. Damasc., *Patrologia Graeca*, v. 94, col. 832.
[^b]: *Ibid*.
[^c]: *Ibid*., col. 849b.
## IV
What more? "Never," they say, have we considered Latins heretics, but only schismatics." But this too they have taken from them (the Latins), for the latter, having nothing with which to accuse us in our doctrine, call us schismatics because we have turned away from the obedience to them which, as they think, we should have. But let us examine the matter. Will it be just for us likewise to show them kindness and place no blame on them in matters of the Faith?
It was they who gave grounds for the schism by openly making the addition (the *Filioque*), which until then they had spoken in secret; while we were the first to separate ourselves from them, or rather, to separate and cut them off from the common Body of the Church. Why, may I ask? Because they have the right Faith or have made the addition (to the Creed) in an Orthodox fashion? Surely whoever would begin to talk like that would not be right in the head. But rather because they have an absurd and impious opinion and for no reason at all made the addition. And so we have turned away from them as from heretics and have shunned them.
What more is necessary? The pious canons speak thus: "He is a heretic and subject to the canons against heretics who even slightly departs from the Orthodox Faith."[^d] If, then, the Latins do not at all depart from the correct Faith, we have evidently cut them off unjustly: but if they have thoroughly departed (from the Faith) -- and that in connection with the theology of the Holy Spirit, blasphemy against Whom is the greatest of all perils -- then it is clear that they are heretics, and we have cut them off as heretics.
[^d]: Nomocanonis tit. XII, c. 2. Pitra, *Juris ecclesiastici Graecorum*, v. 11, p. 600.
Why do we anoint with chrism those of them who come to us? Is it not clear that it is because they are heretics? For the seventh canon of the Second Ecumenical Council states: *As for those heretics who betake themselves to Orthodoxy, and to the lot of those being saved, we accept them in accordance with the subjoined sequence and custom: Arians, and Macedonians, and Sabbatians, and Novatians, those calling themselves Cathari ("Puritans") and Aristeri ("Best"), and the Quartodecimans, otherwise known as Tetradites, and Apollinarians we accept when they offer libelli (recantations in writing) and anathematize every heresy that does not hold the same beliefs as the Catholic and Apostolic Church of God, and are sealed first with holy chrism on their forehead and their eyes, and nose, and mouth, and ears, and in sealing them we say: 'The seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit.'
Do you see with whom we number those who come from the Latins? If all those (enumerated in the canon) are heretics, then it is clear that these (the Latins) are the same. And what does the most wise Patriarch of Antioch, Theodore Balsamon, say of this in reply to the Most Holy Patriarch of Alexandria, Mark? "Imprisoned Latins and others coming to our Catholic churches request communion of the Divine Sacraments. We desire to know: Is this permissible?" (Answer:) "He that is not with Me is against Me; and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth abroad (St. Matt. 12:30; St. Luke 11:23). Because many years ago the celebrated Roman Church was separated from communion with the other four Most Holy Patriarchs, having apostatized into customs and doctrines foreign to the Catholic Church and not Orthodox (it was for this reason that the Pope was not deemed worthy of sharing in the commemoration of the names of the Eastern Patriarchs at Divine Services), -- therefore we must not sanctify one of Latin race through the Divine and most pure Gifts (given) by priestly hands, unless he shall first resolve to depart from Latin dogmas and customs and shall be catechized and joined to those of Orthodoxy."[^e]
[^e]: Theodori Balsamonis Responsa ad interrogationis Marci, n. 15, *PG*, v. 138, col. 968.
Do you hear, how they have departed not only in customs, but also in dogmas foreign to those of Orthodoxy (and what is foreign to Orthodox dogma is, of course, heretical teaching), and that, according to the canons, they must be catechized and united to Orthodoxy? And if it is necessary to catechize, then clearly it is necessary to anoint with chrism. How have they suddenly presented themselves to us as Orthodox, they who for so long and according to the judgment of such great Fathers and Teachers have been considered heretics? Who has so easily "made" them Orthodox? --It is gold, if you desire to acknowledge the truth, and your own thirst for gain; or, to express it better: it did not make them Orthodox, but made you like them and carried you into the camp of the heretics.
## V
"But if," they say, "we had devised some middle ground (compromise) between dogmas, then thanks to this we would have united with them and accomplished our business superbly, without at all having been forced to say anything except what corresponds to custom and has been handed down (by the Fathers)." This is precisely the means by which many, from of old, have been deceived and persuaded to follow those who have led them off to the steep precipice of impiety; believing that there is some sort of middle ground between two teachings that can reconcile obvious contradictions—they have been exposed to peril....
If the Latin dogma is true that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son, then ours is false that states that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (and this is precisely the reason for which we separated from them); and if ours is true, then without a doubt theirs is false. What kind of middle ground can there be between two such judgments? There can be none, unless it were some kind of judgment suitable to both the one and the other, like a boot that fits both feet. And will *this* unite us?....
## VI
But, someone will say, how shall we regard those moderate Greco-Latins who, maintaining a middle ground, openly favor some of the Latin rites and dogmas, favor but do not wish to accept others, and entirely disapprove of still others? One must flee from them as one flees from a snake, as from the Latins themselves, or, it may be, from those who are even worse than they -- as from buyers and sellers of Christ. For they, as the Apostle says, "suppose that gain is godliness" (1 Tim. 6:5), of whom he adds: "flee these" (1 Tim. 6:11), for they go over to them (the Latins) not in order to learn, but for gain. *What communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?* (II Cor. 6: 14-15).
Behold how we, together with Damascene and all the Fathers, do not say that the Spirit proceeds from the Son[^f]; while they, together with the Latins, say that the Spirit proceeds from the Son. And we, together with the divine Dionysios, say that the Father is the sole Source of the supernatural Divinity[^g]; while they say together with the Latins that the Son also is the Source of the Holy Spirit, and by this clearly excluding the Spirit from the Divinity. And we, together with Gregory the Theologian, distinguish the Father from the Son in His capacity of being Cause[^h]; while they together with the Latins unite Them into one in the capacity of being Cause. And we, together with St. Maximus and the Romans of that time and the Western Fathers, "do not make the Son the Cause of the Spirit";[^i] while they, in their [Conciliar Decree (Act of Union)](./florence-1439.md), proclaim the Son "in Greek, Cause, and in Latin, Principle" of the Spirit. And we, together with the Philosopher and Martyr Justin, affirm, "As the Son is from the Father, so is the Spirit from the Father";[^j] while they say together with the Latins that the Son proceeds from the Father immediately, and the Spirit from the Father mediately. And we, together with Damascene and all the Fathers, confess that it is not known to us in what consists the difference between generation and procession;[^k] while they, together with Thomas (Aquinas) and the Latins, say that the difference consists in this, that generation is immediate, and procession mediate. And we affirm, in agreement with the Fathers, that the Will and Energy of the Uncreated and Divine Nature are uncreated; while they, together with the Latins and Thomas, say that Will is identical with Nature, but that the Divine Energy is created, whether it be called Divinity, or the Divine and Immaterial Light, or the Holy Spirit, or something else of this nature, and in some fashion these poor creatures "worship" the created "Divinity" and the created "Divine Light" and the created "Holy Spirit." And we say that neither do the Saints receive the Kingdom and the unutterable blessings already prepared for them, nor are sinners already sent to hell, but both await their fate which will be received in the future age after the resurrection and Judgement; while they, together with the Latins, desire immediately after death to receive according to their merits, and for those in an intermediate condition, who have died in repentance, they give a purgatorial fire (which is not identical with that of hell) so that, as they say, having purified their souls by it after death, they also together with the righteous will enjoy the Kingdom (of Heaven); this is contained in their [Conciliar Decree (Act of Union)](./florence-1439.md). And we, obeying the Apostles who have prohibited it, shun Jewish unleavened bread; while they, in the same Act of Union, proclaim that what is used in the services of the Latins is the Body of Christ. And we say that the addition to the Creed arose uncanonically and anticanonically and contrary to the Fathers; while they affirm that it is canonical and blessed -- to such an extent are they unaware how to conform to the Truth and to themselves! And for us the Pope is as one of the Patriarchs, and that only if he be Orthodox; while they with great gravity proclaim him Vicar of Christ, Father and Teacher of all Christians. May they be more fortunate than their Father, who are also like him: for he does not greatly prosper, having an antipope who is the cause of sufficient unpleasantness; and they are not happy to imitate him.
[^f]: Joann. Damasc. *PG*, v. 36, col. 252.
[^g]: Dionys., *PG*, v. 3, col. 641.
[^h]: *PG*, v. 36, col. 252.
[^i]: *PG*, v. 91, c. 136.
[^j]: Just. Mart., *PG*, v. 6, c. 1224.
[^k]: *PG*, v. 94, c. 824.
## VII
And so, brethren, flee from them and from communion with them, for they are *false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore, it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works* (II Cor. 11:13–15). And in another place the same Apostle says of them: *For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal* (Rom. 16:18; 2 Tim. 2:19). And in another place: *Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision* (Philippians 3:2). And then, in another place: *But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed* (Gal. 1:8). See what has been prophetically foretold, that "though an angel from heaven..." -- so that no one could cite in justification of himself an especially high position. And the beloved Disciple speaks thus: *If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting; for he that giveth him greeting is partaker in his evil deeds* (2 John 10-11).
Therefore, in so far as this is what has been commanded you by the Holy Apostles, -- stand aright, hold firmly to the traditions which you have received, both written and by word of mouth, that you be not deprived of your firmness if you become led away by the delusions of the lawless. May God, Who is All-powerful, make them also to know their delusion; and having delivered us from them as from evil tares, may He gather us into His granaries like pure and useful wheat, in Jesus Christ our Lord, to Whom belongs all glory, honor, and worship, with His Father Who is without beginning, and His All-holy and Good and Life-giving Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.